FOR COMMON GOOD, CANNABIS 'PROHIBITION' SHOULD END

Re: Just Pot meeting

A recent letter by Amy van Elk (Letters to the Editor, Mirror, Dec. 31,
2004) contains some misconceptions.

I believe the writer is sincere, but unfortunately she is misinformed. The
claims of better driving and better school performance are valid, although
not necessarily for all young cannabis users. Tests done on prisoners in
New York in the 1940s showed better learning curves, and better overall
performance on certain tests, among prisoners given cannabis, including
those who had never used cannabis. The study is known as the LaGuardia
commission.

More recent studies (obviously suppressed by the prohibitionist regime)
show that cannabis is one of the safest therapeutic substances known to
man. A certain dose of cannabis actually improves motor skills. Cannabis
does not cause hallucinations in an otherwise healthy individual.

To question the value of a beneficial substance while ignoring the harm of
legally available intoxicants seems hypocritical. No doubt the writer is
unaware of these studies, but they are available if she cares to look for
them. On the other hand, your newspaper is simply a hypocritical
cheerleader for the prohibitionist regime that dictates the 'official' line.

The supposed effect of cannabis on learning and motivation particularly
irks me. There is a large group of people who are quite content to define
'learning' as whatever is taught in established institutions, and
'motivation' as being an absolute condition.

Maybe, along with an economic system dedicated to private profit and a
political system dedicated to protecting private profit, the 'education
system' is just another problem, not a solution. No doubt most slaves would
suffer from lack o 'motivation' to work at their expense for the profit of
others.

Those who see the illegitimacy of a system that claims legitimacy are the
most feared by its proponents. That is the real issue in cannabis
prohibition. Unfortunately those who control the illegitimate system have
managed to pull the wool over many people's eyes.

And there are many others, like yourselves, self-professed guardians of
truth, who neither know nor care about the purpose and value of a human
life. You join the hand-wringing over a unproven 'harm' of a prohibited
substance while ignoring the proven harm of legal substances - because that
is the 'official' line.

If you really cared about the 'problem' of cannabis use you would admit
that prohibition is the true crime, not cannabis use. If you really cared
to keep cannabis out of the hands of young people, you would admit that
legal regulation will do that job much more effectively - and more cheaply
- - than blanket prohibition.

But you don't really care, do you?

David George

Bellingham, WA